What would be a major reasons to prefer R+-Tree over R-Tree for a spatial indexing? As I know, R+-Tree avoid nodes overlapping which lead to more complex code, more complex division algorithms and so on. R*-tree is very similar to R-tree, but minimizes node overlapping and require much less code than R+-tree. So, what would be a reason to choose R+-tree over R*-Tree, except the case when each node lookup requires expensive IO?
Asked
Active
Viewed 2,226 times
1 Answers
1
If you object overlap badly, the R+-tree paritioning may be beneficial, as you have to look at fewer leaves and paths through your tree for searching a particular location.

Has QUIT--Anony-Mousse
- 76,138
- 12
- 138
- 194